Former vice president Al Gore gave what I believe to be
the most important political speech in my lifetime, and
the New York Times, "the newspaper of record,"
did not report it. Not even excerpts.

For the New York Times, it was a nonevent that a
former vice president and presidential candidate, denied
the presidency by one vote of the Supreme Court,
challenged the Bush administration for its illegalities,
rending of the Constitution and disrespect for the
separation of powers.

So much for "the liberal press" that
right-wingers rant about. If a "liberal press"
exists, the New York Times is certainly no longer
a member.

The Washington Post had a short report on
Gore's address at Constitution Hall, but the
newspaper, if that is what it is, managed to water down
the seriousness and urgency of the message that Gore
brought to the country with sneers.

Gore's address is the first sign of leadership from the
Democratic party in six years. This alone makes it a
major news event. But not even his own party took
notice. According to reports, only one Democratic
senator, Dianne Feinstein (CA) was in the audience. One
would have thought the entire Democratic congressional
delegation would have turned out in support of Gore's
challenge to Bush's extraordinary claims of power.

The lack of an opposition party makes the media
vulnerable to intimidation by a dictatorial-minded
administration.

The New York Times ownership suppressed for one
year the leaked information in the paper's possession
that the Bush administration was violating the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act and was spying on Americans
without court warrants. Had the New York Times
not placed a gag in its reporter's mouth and suppressed
the story, Bush may have gone down in defeat as the new
Richard M. Nixon. Clearly, the New York Times is
failing the obligations of a free press.

Bush is angry at the New York Times and at the
government officials who leaked the story that Bush
illegally spied on American citizens. Both may be
prosecuted for making Bush's illegal behavior public.
By ignoring Gore's speech, is the New York Times
signaling to Bush that the newspaper is willing to be a
lap dog in exchange for not being prosecuted?

With the US media now highly concentrated in a few
corporate hands, has the Democratic Party reached the
conclusion that opposition is no longer possible?

Once Bush places Sam Alito on the Supreme Court, he will
have a high court majority friendly to his claims that
his executive powers are not constrained by
congressional statutes or judicial rulings. Once a
president is held to be above the law, whether for
reasons of his role as commander-in-chief or any other,
he can no longer be held accountable.

Conservatives should fear this more than anyone. The
separation of powers and our civil liberties are our
most precious property
rights. They are our patrimony from the
Founding Fathers. We are stewards of these rights, which
we hold in trust for our descendants. How can any
conservative fail to realize that Bush's attack on these
rights is the ultimate attack on property? It is
astonishing to watch conservatives wave the flag while
they are transformed into subjects to be dealt with as
presidential authority decides.

Gore challenged the American people to step up to the
task of defending the Constitution, a task abandoned by
the media, the law schools, and the Democratic and
Republican parties. If we fail, darkness will close
around us.